This is an archive of a past election.|
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/sba/ for current information.
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Public Water Supply
City of Santa Maria
9651 / 48.94% Yes votes ...... 10070 / 51.06% No votes
Index of all Measures
|Results as of Dec 2 8:23am, 99.9% of Precincts Reporting (355/36)|
|Information shown below: Impartial Analysis | Full Text|
Shall the City of Santa Maria adopt an ordinance requiring that substances added to the public water supply for purposes other than to make water safe satisfy two new standards: 1) approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for specified purposes; and 2) cannot contain contaminants at concentrations exceeding either the U.S. Maximum Contaminant Level Goals or California Public Health Goals, whichever is more protective?
In 2002, the California Dental Association Foundation and Fluoridation 2010 Work Group granted the City $402,250 for the installation of fluoridation facilities and operation of the fluoridation system for twelve months. In June 2002, the City Council voted to accept the funds and to fluoridate the City's public water system, in compliance with state law.
Santa Maria operates a public water system with more than 10,000 connections. The City is subject to water quality standards established by the EPA and the DHS. The U. S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") does not regulate additives to public water supplies. Measure W would amend the Santa Maria Municipal Code by requiring that any substance added to the public water supply for purposes other than to make water safe satisfy two new standards. First, Measure W would require FDA approval of the substance for safety and effectiveness with a safety margin that protects against all adverse health and cosmetic effects at all ranges of consumption. Second, Measure W would prohibit the substance from containing contaminants that exceed either the U.S. Maximum Contaminant Level Goals or California Public Health Goals, whichever is most protective.
Since the FDA does not regulate additives to public water supplies, the FDA has not specifically approved the use of fluoride for public water systems. So, Measure W would prohibit the addition of fluoride to the City's water supply.
The California Attorney General and Legislative Counsel have rendered legal opinions that found laws like Measure W conflict with and are preempted by State law which mandates that cities that meet the legal requirements must fluoridate. Under these legal opinions, Measure W would be unenforceable. A superior court in northern California has agreed with these legal opinions and ruled that an ordinance identical to Measure W is preempted and unenforceable. These two legal opinions and court ruling are not binding on the City; however, they are indicators of Measure W's legal status.
s/ Wendy Stockton, Interim City Attorney
News and Analysis|
|Full Text of Measure W2004|
|A statement of reasons for the enactment of the proposed
ordinance as contemplated by our request is as follows:
Whereas, the public drinking water supply should be maintained for the safety and enjoyment of the entire Santa Maria community at all ranges of consumption; and
Whereas, the United States Food and Drug Administration is the only government agency with the authority to approve or reject any claim of safety or effectiveness for any product that is intended to cure, mitigate, treat or prevent any disease in man or animal; and
Whereas, California Public Health Goals and U.S. Maximum Contaminant Level Goals for water are established scientific endpoints for acutely toxic substances at which it has been determined that no known or anticipated adverse health effects will occur, with a margin of safety that is protective for an entire lifetime of ingestion; and
Whereas, Maximum Containment Levels for acutely toxic substances are regulatory endpoints at which the U.S. and the State of California, after consideration of public health goals, costs and benefits of treatment, and political determinations, have established water suppliers must remediate any excesses, and because of these other considerations may not be as protective as public health goals; and
Whereas, other cities adding substances to their public water systems for the purpose of fulfilling health claims have added chemicals that contain contaminants such as lead, arsenic, and mercury at levels that exceed the Public Health Goals and Maximum Contaminant Level Goals established for those contaminants by the State of California and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency;
Be it enacted by the voters of the City of Santa Maria: In order to ensure that the public water of Santa Maria is safe to drink, it shall be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person, agent, or any public or private water system, to add any product, substance, or chemical to the public water supply for the purpose of treating or affecting the physical or mental functions of the body of any person, rather than to make water safe or potable such as in the use of chlorine, unless the substance meets the following criteria:
1) The substance must have been specifically approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for safety and effectiveness with a margin of safety that is protective for all adverse health and cosmetic effects at all ranges of unrestricted consumption.
2) The substance, at Maximum Use Levels, must contain no contaminants at concentrations that exceed U.S. Maximum Contaminant Level Goals or California Public Health Goals, whichever is more protective.
If any provision of this act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity may not affect other provisions or applications of this act that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this act are severable.